https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1979081
--- Comment #4 from Jarek Prokop <jpro...@redhat.com> --- (In reply to Georg Sauthoff from comment #3) > Hm, the summary is pretty much what upstream provides: > > rpm: Upload code to gist.github.com > upstream: upload code to https://gist.github.com > > So this is from the upstream readme/man page. > > Whereas the upstream help starts with another tag line: > > > Gist (v#{Gist::VERSION}) lets you upload to https://gist.github.com/ > > However, I don't mind adding the https:// prefix to the RPM summary. Hmm, fresh run of gem2rpm gives me: ~~~ Summary: Just allows you to upload gists ~~~ Which to me seems good enough. and description: ~~~ %description Provides a single function (Gist.gist) that uploads a gist. ~~~ JFTR the fresh specfile: https://gist.github.com/jackorp/3e88a6abe5c5e57f933d6dc6130a1df2 IIRC both these values are taken from the gem's gemspec, which should be our source of truth for these things (most of the time anyways). > > The RPM description basically summarizes the README.md. I think it is a > better summary than just copying the Synopsis from the README/man page > because it describes additional key points while still keeping it very short. > > > > I'll remove the vendored json and the superfluous rspec dependency. > > FWIW, the rspec depedency comes from the gem2rpm template. Those are BuildRequires taken from gemspec, the maintainer should then decide what makes sense to be included and what does not ;) > I recommend querying upstream if they could include it in the built gem on > RubyGems. Just found out it was removed on purpose. https://github.com/defunkt/gist/commit/b58ff3eb9dd8403af3f801be0eafcb2eb6f4ab2a But I think we can still take the generated manpage from upstream (if they are current that is), which eases up on build dependencies and we don't have to generate it ourselves. (Writing it again, as I forgot that it should be a raw textfile) `Source1: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/defunkt/gist/v6.0.0/build/gist.1` -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
